Since 1992, when chapter 13 on mountains as fragile ecosystems was introduced in Agenda
21, the demand for goods and services from mountains has grown considerably. Moreover, the
ability of mountain systems to provide essential goods and services for all of people and
ecosystems is increasingly under threat from climate change, globalization, ongoing land
degradation, a chronic lack of sustainable investment and unsustainable pattern of resource
use.

The CEEweb for Biodiversity, a network of more than 60 NGOs in Central and East Europe,
and Mountain Partnership members recognize that despite the progress that has been made in
promoting sustainable development of mountain regions, national and international
development agendas still treat mountains as marginal environments. As a result, e.g. poverty
rates and depopulation are higher than in non-mountain areas. In particular, mountains are
increasingly threatened by unsustainable investments, e.g. in tourism infrastructure. After 20
years of declarations, there are only single but no concerted actions in place driven by the
United Nations System or Governments responsible for mountain ecosystems.

In the context of a Green Economy, new opportunities for investments by the private sector
are emerging in mountain regions, especially in renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and
ecosystem goods and services. However, innovative institutional arrangements are urgently
required to trigger governance models and decision support systems aiming at both the
integration of the social, ecological and economic capital at all scales in mountain regions, as
well as the actual mainstreaming of mountains into overall national and regional development
and conservation processes, such as in the Carpathians and the Alps with a number of legally
binding protocols (e.g. on tourism, biodiversity).

Enhancing the global political commitment that translates into increased sustainable
investments tailored to mountain regions will directly benefit poor mountain communities and
indirectly humanity as a whole. Hence, sustainable mountain development, notably through
integrated and socially inclusive policies, as well as low carbon technologies, should have a
prominent place in the Rio 2012 agenda and in particular in its final declaration. To achieve
these ends strong and united advocacy for mountain issues with tangible results in future
UNCSD negotiations is essential.

In the past 20 years the global sustainable development process has become a unique policy
making platform under the umbrella of the United Nations. Notwithstanding all the efforts
made in its framework, there are several symptoms today, which warn us that we need more
significant changes in the way we tackle socio-economic and environmental issues on global
levels. We see worsening trends both in social and environmental fields. Since the world?s
carrying capacity was exceeded1, we have been accumulating ecological debt with many-
decade-long payback period. This has led to the degradation of 60% of ecosystem services
globally2, which, however, underpin wellbeing for all. Population boom, expected to result in a
population of 9 billion people within four decades further lowers the chance of stepping to the
path of sustainability within the current framework and poses far bigger challenges to tackle.

These phenomena prove that we manage our common goods (natural resources and land) in
an unsustainable way and we cannot share the benefits arising from these resources equitably
at national, as well as global levels. This has serious consequences not only for the global
ecosystems, but also for poverty eradication, international relations, security or long term
economic viability. Even though these problems have been apparent for many decades, our
responses failed to tackle the problems within the current socio-economic framework. As the
recent report of the International Resource Panel3 points out, in order to tackle to resource
overuse on global level and not to put further pressure on ecosystems, an absolute and radical
reduction is needed. This requires new paradigms and holistic approach, since one cannot
solve the problems with the same kind of thinking one used when creating them.

CEEweb?s recommendations for the Rio+20 Conference outcome

1. The urgency of the global environmental and social problems shall result in a global deal on
development, which can ensure that economic activities stay within the global carrying
capacity, the access to resources and land is ensured to all, and the generated benefits are
shared equitably. Such a global deal shall be translated into concrete actions underpinned by
strong political will, and regularly monitored with an active involvement of the civil society. A
green economy roadmap shall provide a framework for these actions.

2. The actions shall bridge implementation gaps through adopting a new paradigm. For this aim
the Conference shall provide an assessment why previous efforts have failed to deliver global
targets on sustainable development. While it is a common objective of countries to ensure
and increase human wellbeing for all on the principle of equitability, we cannot solve this aim
as long as we deal with economic, social and environmental issues separately, which was a
main reason of past failures. The Conference shall reveal the complex interrelations among
the only seemingly independent sectoral challenges. For this aim all aspects of the DPSIR4
framework (drivers, pressures, state, impacts and responses) have to be considered within
the context of these environmental and socio-economic problems. These challenges, such as
growing social inequalities and the associated hunger and poverty, the financial and
economic crisis and the fragility of the financial system and the economy, the environmental
crisis including climate change and biodiversity loss, international disputes over trade,
resource use and benefit sharing are all interrelated on the level of the cultural, institutional
and structural levels of the drivers. Addressing them requires finding the most effective
intervention points of the drivers, such as the regulatory framework of land and resource use,
which can greatly contribute to tackling environmental, economic and social problems.

3. The assessment of the complex interrelations among environmental, social and economic
issues helps redefining the concept of development globally. Societies, including economies,
need to adapt to the environmental conditions and changing circumstances, which shall
orient development pathways. Within a green economy current economic growth models
need to be changed urgently.

4. The Rio principles and spirit, including the principle of common but differentiated
responsibilities, and the precautionary principle should be the basis for the international
community to strengthen cooperation and move forward on sustainable development.
Actions shall be firmly based on sound science and ethics to fully take into account both
environmental and social considerations.

5. Transition to a green economy requires that total environmental pressures (originating from
resource use, land use and from pollution and alien genotypes) are absolutely limited and
reduced to stay within the carrying capacity of the Earth. If this is not achieved,
environmental degradation continues. For this aim changing the boundary conditions of the
economy and more specifically reducing the resource use globally is inevitable in line with the
recommendations of the International Resource Panel. This shall be realised together with
ensuring equal access to resources and equitable sharing of benefits for all.

6. Reducing resource use addresses the drivers on institutional level, while radically changes
production and consumption patterns and the values of people. It also balances human and
machine labour and thus increases employment. It results in a structural change in the global
economy, and, if properly realised, can reduce social inequalities nationally and globally.

7. Actions to address production and consumption patterns shall include an energy quota
scheme. This introduces an incentive system, which can ensure the access to resources,
reduce the differences in resource use and help realising resource efficiency investments for
all. It can also boost research, innovation and employment in sectors that contribute to the
efficient and sustainable use of resources. The four pillars an energy use quota system5 shall
cover all non-renewable energy sources, and they should be applied on national and global
levels:

- Resource use quota system introduced for countries on international
level and for each individual, public and private consumer on national level.
The quota system ensures the yearly reduction of all non-renewable energy
resources on global level. Those, who save part of their allocated annual
quotas, can sell their remaining quotas through the quota managing
organization to those who have consumed more than their allocated quotas.
The quota managing organization sells the quota in the national currencies,
and buys the remaining quota for quota money.

- The market for environmental goods and services is an open market
operating according to environmental and ethical rules including aspects of
sustainability and market considerations. The quota money received from
selling energy quotas could be exchanged to products in this ?eco-labelled?
secondary market.

- The Revolving Fund provides the opportunity for everyone, both energy
producers and consumers, to be able to achieve savings through energy
efficiency and renewable energy investments. The Revolving Fund provides
interest free loan in quota money with a payback period adjusted to the
energy savings or income generation realised through the investment.

- The Support Service aims to provide advice on lifestyle, planning, social
and environmental issues, as well as information on the functioning of the
scheme to consumers.

8. The global quota scheme enables the necessary radical change in developed countries, as well
as leapfrogging in developing countries. Applying the quota scheme at international level can
generate funds for innovations, technology transfer and capacity building in developing
countries from the trade of energy quotas.

9. Sustainable land management shall be another cornerstone of green economy as a basis of
food security and agriculture, sound water management and improved resilience and disaster
prevention among others. This shall also specifically consider the significant role of
ecosystems (e.g. water related ecosystems (such as peatlands, lakes and marine habitats) and
all forests) in climate change adaptation and mitigation due to their enormous capacity in
carbon storage, and the need to make them part of national and international climate change
policies. Actions to realise a green economy shall include effective measures to integrate
green infrastructure in development planning.

10. Existing international governance arrangements are not up to the task in their current
framework and thus cannot deliver implementation, integration and coherence among the
various parts of the system. Within an improved structure increased coherence is needed
among Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), intergovernmental bodies and
international organizations to address sustainable resource and land use as the basis of green
economy.

11. Current global governance and institutions for sustainable development need to be reformed
and improved, including the upgrading of UNEP and the International Resource Panel to
support its work and strengthening the Commission on Sustainable Development.

12. Regional cooperation needs to be strengthened for common policy responses, experience
exchange, common projects and other means in order to realise international commitments.

13. Arrangements to improve participatory democratic governance at national and sub-national
levels are essential to make global commitments work. New arrangements shall ensure that
the voice of all stakeholders, including the civil society, NGOs and the private sector are
heard. This also requires the active engagement and empowerment of underrepresented
groups of the society such as women, youth, the unemployed and vulnerable.